Scholarlink

<p>In the bi/multilingual common law jurisdictions, legal judgments often involve more than one language, particularly due to the reliance on case law. In the context of Hong Kong’s bilingual legal system, judicial precedents do not possess the same bilingual authenticity as statutes and ordinances. With a navigation of translation approaches in both general and legal contexts, this study focuses on a widely adopted translation approach, “意譯” (<i>yiyi</i>, paraphrasing translation), and investigates the use of this translation approach in the legal judgments which are drafted in the Chinese language. Based on case analyses, three key issues have been identified in judges’ application of this translation approach. They are (1) rewriting in another language, (2) selecting language versions, and (3) rewriting in the same language. Then, the concept of “意譯” has also been reinterpreted and extended beyond a mere translation strategy&#xa0;to&#xa0;an interpretive intervention in judicial meaning/decision making. This study highlights the linguistic tensions inherent in employing this translation strategy, while also revealing the autonomy it grants judges in meaning making, which potentially challenges the realisation of justice in a bi/multilingual context.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Linguistic Tension in the Postcolonial Judicial Landscape: A Case Study of Legal Bilingualism in Hong Kong SAR

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年8月19日

查看全文
  • Wei Yu

摘要

In the bi/multilingual common law jurisdictions, legal judgments often involve more than one language, particularly due to the reliance on case law. In the context of Hong Kong’s bilingual legal system, judicial precedents do not possess the same bilingual authenticity as statutes and ordinances. With a navigation of translation approaches in both general and legal contexts, this study focuses on a widely adopted translation approach, “意譯” (yiyi, paraphrasing translation), and investigates the use of this translation approach in the legal judgments which are drafted in the Chinese language. Based on case analyses, three key issues have been identified in judges’ application of this translation approach. They are (1) rewriting in another language, (2) selecting language versions, and (3) rewriting in the same language. Then, the concept of “意譯” has also been reinterpreted and extended beyond a mere translation strategy to an interpretive intervention in judicial meaning/decision making. This study highlights the linguistic tensions inherent in employing this translation strategy, while also revealing the autonomy it grants judges in meaning making, which potentially challenges the realisation of justice in a bi/multilingual context.